ConclusionThe purpose of this project was to explore and document one approach for integrating social media--Facebook, really--into freshman writing. The assignment using Facebook was first given in 2006 and twice more through 2009. The assignment seemed to help students effectively...

ObservationsWhen we asked students to write about the ethos of a self as mediated through Facebook and to put that into a cultural context, we were not sure what we would find. We knew we were at an important sociotechnical moment. Across the three years of first-year writing students were asked to examine another person's online identity...

You are not the first to respond that way. We focus heavily on audience, purpose, effect, and situation--rhetorical contexts: It becomes the authors' responsibility to describe their peer in a way that retains that person's integrity in public conversations. Of course, if you put that together with the concerns they express about how they could be perceived, it provides another explanation for why their claims could seem superficial.

While such claims may seem superficial to us, they may be informative from the perspectives of the students. This may speak to the level of detail at which students examine Facebook pages, the level it takes for them to decide about a person, and how they determine whether or not to connect.

It may also be that they know that the rhetorical task of the assignment was to maintain the integrity of their peers and, so, they provided safe answers in order to do so. It may also be that students identified enough with the assignment to adequately complete it but that they prioritized social connections over their academic identity.

By the time they do in-class peer reviews for this assignment, they have already done them several times during the semester. At first students strongly resisted and even groaned. They don't want to share their work, they are not sure they have anything to say about another person's work, they didn't buy their book yet and, so, could not complete the assignment. The in-class feedback is generally quick and students make only a few comments. I'd like them to make more; however, their approach is likely better, as they already conducted thorough peer reviews as homework assignments.

At first students make fewer comments and those are not very directed. They write, "I liked it" and "good job." Even though they complain that other people give them vague or "not very helpful" feedback, they try to continue to comment in ways that support social more so than academic connections. In part, it is likely because providing peer feedback is new and, so, they do not have models from which to begin to engage in such academic discussions. As students have many conversations about APES, the unit topics, and elements of effective writing, and as they participate in more conversations, their peer reviews and conversations in class and their writing become more directed, and they become more engaged.

Yes. However, they do not need it for this task, which is another reason the approach the students take is beneficial (thank you for pointing that out). Quantity does not matter but engagement does. Students pass along papers clockwise. If they already have a paper when they get a paper, they pass it to someone who is without a paper or someone about to finish a paper. This activity is done for a specific amount (often about 40 minutes) of time rather than for a specific number of papers. No one realizes how many papers others have read.

The Facebook assignment came in today. They took them seriously, which I could tell from their drafts and careful attention to peer reviews. Often a number of students skip peer reviews. This time, only two people did not do them, one of which was absent on the day they exchanged paper drafts.

Just gave the Facebook papers assignment to first-year writing. For the most part, class conversation resembled those from previous semesters. More students use privacy features now, but students generally have fewer concerns about friending a classmate. Here is one interesting exchange.

We received helpful feedback from Kairos editors and reviewers. While they made many suggestions, two points need close attention. First, the fact that we found student papers to be boring seemed uninteresting and, perhaps, myopic. Second, they want to be clear that we followed our IRB guidelines.

The revision needs to clarify that what is of interest about the claims made in the student papers is that they did not seem to match the analytical depth or skill that the same students demonstrated through their arguments in the same paper or that the class as a whole demonstrated during discussions. The revision needs to explain why that observation is of interest.

We have worked through the IRB issues. As you know, that is what we spent this year doing. As we discussed last year, we only asked and will only ask for participation and informed consent after grades have been released. We are going to use pseudonyms and stock photos for student subjects. As researchers, we will not examine the students' actual Facebook sites.

Because we had to propose a new study, some of the data that we had could not be used. Some of the data could be used if we could find specific students and they agree to sign the new informed consent forms, but we have been unable to find some of them. With the new study, we have the opportunity to look at the assignment being used this year and next year.

That makes sense. It used to be that most of what was published on the internet was considered public, but posts to the internet were not and are not all public. The research community needed more complex ways of looking at mediated, networked communications.

That isn't so clear. It started with "You cannot use Facebook" and ended with him muttering under his breath, "This is why we do not do research with students." Between the two statements were about an hour of questions and answers. Mostly, I asked questions and the IRB responded with, "that is a grey area." While the IRB had some concerns about studying uses of Facebook, their primary concerns were about using students, particularly current students, as subjects, which is complicated when introducing the variables that come along with studying Facebook.

I'm going to talk with them again. As of now, even if students gave written informed consent and even if they want us to use their names and photos, we cannot use them. We are not allowed to ask for student permission to use their papers or discussions until after course grades have been submitted. There is some information we can use in aggregate.

I'm proud of the class today. They engaged in debates about privacy, social networking, and parameters of their assignment. All but one person talked, and even she seemed engaged, sitting forward in her chair and watching people talk. Usually she watches her shoes from behind the bill of her cap. Today she wore her cap backwards. Even Angie talked today. She almost never talks. Putting the responsibility for learning on the students can be powerful.

You are now analysts. You will examine the assigned Facebook profile and determine three to five defining characteristics of that person. Part of your rhetorical task is to capture and maintain the character of your peer and then convey your findings to a public audience that is mostly peers but also includes people in positions to evaluate the person. In completing this assignment, as you have done with your previous papers, you will make claims, provide support, and explain the warrants. This assignment develops your research, analytical, and argument skills.

Oh, you still have to read. Reading is integral. You'll read from your textbook, and, like the previous paper, you will have reading assignments for each class period. You will read your peers' papers.

When doing this assignment, you are not judging each other as in being judgmental. You are drawing conclusions based on data available at the assigned site or links posted there. All claims must emerge from data and in the papers all claims must be supported with evidence. For the assignment, a person could not successfully judge you as being a [fill in the blank] based just on wall posts or just because of photos. Authors must consider the range of data and then make observations.

There were power relationships at play. Even though Deb said students did not have to use Facebook or MySpace, the students were not aware of other options, such as opting for another assignment. It wasn't as though students were presented two options and then were allowed to choose one. Because Deb has the power to assign grades, because students have learned long before this class that that their role as a student is to follow the instructor, because only one option was presented, and because selecting an option different than their peers does not seem like a choice, students may not have believed there was really a choice--even if from Deb's perspective there was an alternate.

All true. I could have made it more explicit that my questions were designed as catalysts for thoughts and discussions about uses of technology and not to coerce students into using Facebook. Intellectually and emotionally, telling students that I plan to confront their ideas and then doing so is different from confronting them without warning.

In the first scenario, students play out a script that seems to demonstrate their intellect and they can do so in detached ways: I say something, teacher asks a question from a different perspective, I show that I understand by adjusting my response even if I do not believe what I am saying.

In the second scenario, the confrontation is unexpected and, thus, there is at least a fraction of time from which the speaker (student or teacher) reacts with heightened emotion, and that reaction gives rise not to canned answers but a need to examine the more primal response. Therefore, while a different approach might have helped students understand the purpose of the assignment better or at a much earlier stage, it also might have sacrificed the spontaneity and honesty of those initial conversations. Each approach can be used for different needs.

It will be important for an instructor considering this assignment to plan for a student who doesn't wish to allow others to view his/her account, for privacy or personal reasons. While Deb's plan is to have that student evaluate her own account, power structures in the classroom could make such an arrangement problematic.

Good point, Jonathan. I'll have to also consider additional changes based on changes up until that semester. Perhaps I will also have to consider if Facebook is the place to examine reading, writing, and identification.

This is good. Right now, you are all conducting analyses. This is the kind of "work" people will ask of you in your classes, for example. You will be asked to look at something in total, piece by piece, and in terms of its patterns or relationships. You'll be asked to describe it and those patterns in ways that help others recognize them (or, in many classes, to demonstrate that you understand them). You'll likely be asked to discuss what those patterns or observations might mean.

Our discussion tells me that most of you already know how to do this, and that is what you are doing in your papers. In this paper, you will look at patterns of what you see on a profile, make some claims about what you noticed, tell us those claims, show us the evidence of those claims (the details you gathered from the wall, status updates, photos, and the like), and help us see how those fit together based on what you saw (why the claims are warranted based on the provided support).

It may seem irrelevant or irreverent to include in this webtext that a student was banned from Facebook; however, instructors need to be aware of this as a possibility if they plan to use social networking sites in the classroom.

When students indicate that they do not have Facebook accounts, they might be embarrassed if the instructor asks if they are willing to open an account. They may have had an account that they are now banned from using.

There are a number of ways to be completely or partially banned from Facebook, including the use of offensive language or posts. If a user sends too many messages or conducts too many chats within a short amount of time, that feature might be disabled for an hour or up to three days, longer depending upon the circumstances.

The students effectively analyzed uses of the "groups" feature within Facebook. Most group sites were not places to engage; rather, they were "worn" like a t-shirt. Facebook later distinguished between active groups from their newly added "Fan" pages, sites that users "like" in order to wear that page. When users click an "I like this" button, they announce to all of their friends and anyone with access to their wall that they like that page.

So people can currently see your relationship status, photos, and posts. People can already decide that you are a lesbian because you are female and your relationship status indicates that you are in a relationship with someone that appears to be female. People can already look at your photos and see that, at least from body language and the captions, you are interested in men. Correct?

Just gave students their assignment to analyze a classmate's Facebook site and write a paper about that person based on their findings and to do so in a way that speculates about uses of technology in our culture.

Course Description, Objectives, & StandardsThe department has a common syllabus for first year writing which includes a course description, objectives, and grading standards that all instructors must follow, including Deb in the course in which the Facebook assignment was given...

A Focus on Learning Learning classrooms can look different than teaching classrooms. To demonstrate this point, Robert B. Barr and John Tagg (1995) shared an experience of a faculty member who was about to be observed...

I approach freshman writing from within a learning paradigm. To understand an assignment in a learning paradigm means to understand how opportunities for learning are structured within the course and the assignment. To provide context for what students have begun calling "the Facebook paper," The Facebook Papers and I will discuss learning, the courses in which the assignment was given, and the assignment in a couple of notes: A Focus on Learning; Course Description, Objectives, & Standards; and The Facebook Papers Unit Prompt.

What is a Residential College?Because Deb lived in a freshman residence hall and because two of the three classes in which she administered the assignment were for Residential College, it may help to understand Residential College. At her institution, ResColl is designed in part to help students develop academic identities...

Because I'm now a Faculty in Residence (and Interim Faculty Coordinator) for our Residential College program and because I live with them, I see students transition socially and academically. It seems that they need to establish themselves socially before they are comfortable fully focusing on academics.

Writing, Culture, & TechnologyI wanted to immerse in the writing spaces of Facebook before I ever saw it. After talking with Evelyn, I wanted to connect—identify—with others through the site and I wanted to connect— conceptualize—social networking within the history of print and cultural change...

If students are that engaged with Facebook, I'm pretty sure I need to learn about it. If people are that invested in a writing technology, I know I want to better understand it. I'm going to post a note.

Kenneth Burke on Unity/Identity.This is the last note from Evelyn regarding her initial interest in this project. In short, Burke (1950) believed that people are born apart from each other and are, therefore, divided by biology and then by social class and hierarchies...

On Facebook & FriendsThis is Evelyn's note. Facebook is an online community that used to limit membership to college students, then to high school students, then to those with company emails, but currently, "anyone can join..."

Since our conversation, we are both still interested in freshman writers and their uses of social networking, so Evelyn and I want to explore ways it may be affecting our composition classrooms generally. More specifically, in this project we want to explore ways that social networking sites might be integrated into writing assignments. We want to focus particularly on assignments to be crafted within traditional courses or within those with common syllabi, such as those that emphasize essay and argumentative structures.

Deb and Evelyn realized that somehow the student relationships to this technology were different, and they became interested in finding out how such obsessions with this technology could be used in a classroom.

Our campus began staff development sessions about the new students. Our Liberal Arts Council based their talks on the seven core traits of millennials identified in Millennials Go to College (Howe & Strauss, 2007): special, sheltered, confident, team-oriented, conventional, pressured, and achieving.

Our campus has been adjusting to new values, behaviors, and expectations. With increasing frequency, parents come to advising or other campus offices with and sometimes for students to which administrators responded by creating release forms students can sign so parents can legally take part in discussions that involve educational records.

In Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives (2008), Palfrey and Gasser used the term "digital natives" to describe those people who were born into a world of fast-growing social technologies. Educators and administrators, who are primarily "digital immigrants," now have to understand that digital natives not only act in new ways, they think in new ways as well.

These new values, behaviors, and expectations are likely primarily a result of the so-called Millennial generation arriving full force in the academy. Paid employment among such teens has fallen from those of previous years, and recall that this is a generation that has grown up in an era that placed a high value on children. The idea that rules might have to be altered in order to allow for parents to attend if not outright lead counseling sessions with parents shouldn't surprise us; the Millennial generation is closer to their parents than Baby Boomers or Generation X were to theirs.

Educational records are protected by The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). If the student is 18 years of age or older, an institution cannot release information about educational records without consent from the student, not even to parents who pay the tuition. If students want to involve parents, they need to give permission. Each institution interprets the act for its campus. Our institution has release forms; other institutions forego signatures and assume that by students bringing parents to the meetings that students already grant access. More information on FERPA can currently be found at the website for the US Department of Education.

Evelyn began informal discussions with her students about their uses of digital technology. Student responses led her to a more formal survey that she gives to her students at the beginning of each term. The survey was designed to address topics such as how often students check their email, social networking sites, and their text messages.

Evelyn first learned of Facebook--and other social networking sites such as MySpace--when she asked her first-year composition students to analyze the use of technology in the United States by examining their own technological habits.